The New York Times' resident political predictor says President Barack Obama currently has a 74.6% chance of winning re-election. It's a prediction that liberals, whose heart rates continue to fluctuate with the release of every new poll, want to take solace in, but somehow can't. Sure, this is the guy who correctly predicted the outcome of the 2008 election in 49 of 50 states, but this year's polls suggest a nail-biter.

He did fine, actually. Started off as too close to call about a year out then was mostly "Walker likely to survive" for the rest of the time.

But it was a no-brainer; Walker's approval rating was never underwater. That alone would make him a likely winner, but even then some of the "disapproves" were going to vote for Walker because, regardless of their disapproval, they didn't believe a full-on recall election was justified. When viewed in that way, Silver's performance looks a bit worse, as he should have gone all the way to saying Walker was an almost-certain winner.

Given how straight-forward that race really was (as outlined above), I don't think his performance there reflects positively on his predictions for the presidential race.

13
posted on 10/29/2012 3:03:23 PM PDT
by verum ago
(Some people must truly be in love, for only love can be so blind.)

Nate Silver is actually playing a pretty smart game here. He’s building a following of libs. When he’s wrong, he will suffer no consequences at all because he is a lib. If he happens to somehow be right, he’s a hero. It’s a no lose situation for him. Our scorn means nothing to him.

They cannot be the same guy. The guy over at 538 is 75.9876% certain that Romney is a looser. He has no chance in Ohio, all the recent polls show Romney lost his momentum and that Obama is solidifying his lead.

No matter what happens, Obama, Silver, Biden, Hillary...they’re ALL heroes for life for the leftist droolers.

These people, remember, still think of Jimmy Carter as a hero. LBJ, too...all of LBJ’s micro-management and subsequent handcuffing of America in Vietnam, his ruination of the black family via welfare, all of that is FORGOTTEN.

Clinton’s obvious failures in lying under oath, his sleeping at the wheel as the dot-com bubble inflated the stock market, his weak-kneed response to the Cole bombings and embassy bombings in Africa, all FORGOTTEN.

The leftists make HEROES out of their failures—contrast this to conservatives...arguably the worst Republican president in the last 50 years was Nixon. You ever hear a full throated defense of him from conservatives? Nope. You hear the truth: while good on anti-Communist expansion and a need to engage China, Nixon screwed up by wage and price controls and implementing the horrendous EPA.

Basically, I think conservatives are MORE HONEST about their history—liberals whitewash and deify their heroes.

Reagan is, I admit, a bit of a “demigod” by us conservatives....but only because he was SUCH a rarity and fought so long to finally win the presidency. Still, Reagan left us with some problems: Sandra Day O’Connor, for instance...and his response to the Marine bombing in Lebanon wasn’t the best. My point isn’t to rip Reagan...he was 10,000 times better than Carter. He just wasn’t perfect.

Romney, too, won’t be perfect. Far from it. He WILL be a better President than Obama.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.